Mood and Feelings Questionnaire-Self Report (MFQ-Self)

1. Abstract

The Mood and Feelings Questionnaire-Self Report (MFQ-Self), and particularly its widely utilized 13-item short form (SMFQ-Self), is an empirically validated psychometric screening instrument designed to measure recent depressive symptomatology in children and adolescents aged 6 to 17 years. Originally developed in the early 1990s by Adrian Angold, Elizabeth Jane Costello, and their colleagues at the Center for Developmental Epidemiology at Duke University Medical Center, the instrument operationalizes the diagnostic criteria for major depressive disorder specified in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-III-R, DSM-IV, and DSM-5). The instrument asks youth to evaluate their cognitive, affective, psychomotor, and vegetative states over the preceding two weeks using a 3-point Likert response format (0 = Not True, 1 = Sometimes, 2 = True).

Across extensive epidemiological and clinical investigations, the MFQ-Self and SMFQ-Self have demonstrated exceptional psychometric properties. Internal consistency estimates routinely yield Cronbach’s alpha coefficients ranging between .85 and .92 across both non-clinical community cohorts and adolescent psychiatric inpatient samples. Factor analytic studies consistently confirm an overarching unidimensional general depression factor, alongside nuanced bi-factor or multidimensional structures reflecting negative self-evaluation, dysphoria/anhedonia, and fatigue/somatic complaints. The instrument exhibits robust convergent validity through strong correlations with legacy measures such as the Children’s Depression Inventory (CDI), the Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children (DISC), and the Revised Child Anxiety and Depression Scale (RCADS). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses support diverse cut-off scores—ranging from 4 to 8 on the short form depending on the clinical versus epidemiological context—delivering optimal balances between sensitivity (0.66–0.90) and specificity (0.61–0.94) for detecting DSM-congruent unipolar depressive episodes. This article provides a comprehensive academic analysis of the MFQ-Self, encompassing its theoretical foundations, structural and metric validity, reliability metrics, clinical cutoffs, and administration standards.

2. Keywords

Mood and Feelings Questionnaire, MFQ-Self, Short Mood and Feelings Questionnaire, SMFQ, pediatric depression, adolescent depressive symptomatology, psychometrics, screening tool, DSM-5 depression criteria, internalizing disorders, child psychopathology, developmental epidemiology

3. Authors

The Mood and Feelings Questionnaire (MFQ) suite was conceptualized and developed by an interdisciplinary team of psychiatric epidemiologists, biostatisticians, and clinical psychologists at the Center for Developmental Epidemiology within the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences at Duke University Medical Center (Durham, North Carolina, USA), in collaboration with colleagues at the Institute of Psychiatry, King’s College London (London, UK).

• Adrian Angold, MRCPsych – Professor Emeritus of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University Medical Center. Dr. Angold is an internationally recognized expert in child psychiatric epidemiology and nosology.
• E. Jane Costello, Ph.D. – Professor of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University Medical Center. Renowned for leading landmark epidemiological studies, including the Great Smoky Mountains Study of Youth.
• Stephen C. Messer, Ph.D. – Associate Professor and psychometrician, Center for Developmental Epidemiology, Duke University Medical Center.
• Andrew Pickles, Ph.D. – Professor of Biostatistics and Methodology, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King’s College London.
• F. Winder, M.Sc. – Research Associate, Developmental Epidemiology Program, Duke University.
• D. Silver, M.D. – Child and Adolescent Psychiatrist, Clinical Investigator, Duke University Medical Center.

Institutional Correspondence: Center for Developmental Epidemiology, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, Box 3454, Durham, NC 27710, USA.

4. Purpose

The primary clinical and epidemiological objective of the Mood and Feelings Questionnaire-Self Report (MFQ-Self) is to provide a rapid, psychometrically robust, and developmentally sensitive self-report assessment of depressive symptoms in youth aged 6 to 17 years. Prior to the development of the MFQ, child depression assessments frequently relied on downward extensions of adult depression inventories that either suffered from psycholinguistic complexity, overemphasized somatic symptoms that conflate with normative pediatric physiological changes, or failed to capture core DSM-derived diagnostic criteria.

The MFQ was designed from its inception to bridge the gap between categorical psychiatric diagnoses established through clinical interviews—such as the Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Assessment (CAPA) or the Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children (DISC)—and dimensional psychometric screening in population-based studies. The instrument systematically captures recent affective, cognitive, and vegetative changes experienced during a defined two-week time window, mirroring the diagnostic duration criterion mandated by DSM-III-R, DSM-IV, and DSM-5 for Major Depressive Episodes.

In clinical practice, the MFQ-Self fulfills several distinct diagnostic and monitoring functions:

• Universal and Targeted Screening: It functions effectively in school-based mental health initiatives, pediatric primary care clinics, and community youth centers to identify individuals at elevated risk who require comprehensive clinical follow-up.
• Treatment Progress Monitoring (Measurement-Based Care): Due to its brief administration time (typically 2 to 4 minutes for the 13-item short form) and high sensitivity to state-dependent symptom changes, clinicians employ the MFQ-Self as a session-by-session outcome measure during evidence-based psychotherapies (such as Cognitive Behavioral Therapy or Interpersonal Psychotherapy) and pharmacological trials.
• Multi-Informant Triangulation: The MFQ suite features parallel parent-report (MFQ-Parent) and teacher-report forms. Extensive epidemiological research reveals that while parents and teachers are superior informants for externalizing, observable psychomotor agitation, or behavioral disruptions, youths themselves are systematically more accurate informants regarding internalizing, subjective emotional distress, guilt, cognitive self-reproach, and suicidal ideation. Combining the MFQ-Self with the parent-report version yields superior diagnostic discrimination compared to either informant alone.
• Epidemiological Surveillance: In large-scale psychiatric cohort studies (such as the Great Smoky Mountains Study, the ALSPAC cohort, and the Millennium Cohort Study), the MFQ provides a continuous metric of depression severity, facilitating structural equation modeling, latent trajectory modeling, and longitudinal tracking of adolescent affective illness into early adulthood.

5. Psychological Construct

The construct assessed by the MFQ-Self is pediatric depressive symptomatology, conceived as a multidimensional yet strongly coherent internalizing psychopathological continuum. In pediatric and adolescent populations, depression manifests through a complex constellation of subjective emotional suffering, cognitive distortions, psychomotor alterations, and neurovegetative dysregulation. The MFQ-Self maps directly onto the primary domains outlined by contemporary psychiatric nosology:

5.1. Dysphoric Affect and Depressed Mood

Depressed mood in youth can present as profound sadness, tearfulness, or extreme irritability and affective lability. The MFQ-Self taps directly into this experiential state with items such as “I felt miserable or unhappy” and “I cried a lot.” Unlike adult depressive states which are frequently marked by sustained blunted affect, pediatric depression often demonstrates rapid mood reactivity to immediate environmental stressors or social rejections, making the assessment of persistent underlying misery essential.

5.2. Anhedonia and Loss of Positive Valence

Anhedonia—the marked diminution of pleasure or interest in nearly all daily activities—is a cardinal diagnostic hallmark of melancholic and major depressive episodes. The MFQ-Self evaluates this construct through the item “I didn’t enjoy anything at all.” Within pediatric populations, the failure to experience reward anticipation or consummatory pleasure interferes drastically with normative academic engagement, peer socialization, and developmental milestone attainment.

5.3. Cognitive Triad: Worthlessness, Guilt, and Self-Deprecation

A core innovation of the MFQ-Self is its rich operationalization of depressogenic cognitive distortions. Youth suffering from clinical depression internalize intense feelings of inadequacy, moral failure, and low perceived self-efficacy. This cognitive domain is probed through multiple self-referential evaluations:

• Negative Self-Evaluation: Evaluated by statements such as “I felt I was no good anymore” and “I thought I could never be as good as other kids.” This reflects social comparison deficits and deep-seated perceptions of structural inferiority.
• Self-Directed Hostility and Moral Self-Condemnation: Items such as “I hated myself,” “I was a bad person,” and “I did everything wrong” capture excessive, inappropriate guilt and pathological self-blame, which are prominent precursors to nonsuicidal self-injury and active suicidal intent.

5.4. Interpersonal Alienation and Perceived Abandonment

Depressed adolescents characteristically experience profound interpersonal disconnection and perceived lack of social support, reflected in the items “I felt lonely” and “I thought nobody really loved me.” These beliefs exacerbate social withdrawal, leading to rejection sensitivity and cyclical disruption of attachment bonds with primary caregivers and peer groups.

5.5. Psychomotor and Neurovegetative Dysregulation

Somatic and physical manifestations are captured via items targeting energy regulation and psychomotor behavior:

• Anergia and Hypoactivity: Captured by “I felt so tired I just sat around and did nothing,” measuring the pronounced subjective fatigue and loss of physical drive that accompanies neuroendocrine and monoaminergic alterations.
• Psychomotor Agitation: Assessed by “I was very restless,” capturing the physical inability to sit still, motor pacing, and physical tension that frequently accompanies anxious and irritable depression in youth.
• Executive and Attentional Inefficiency: Reflected in the item “I found it hard to think properly or concentrate.” Depressive cognitive interference blunts processing speed, working memory, and sustained attention, manifesting clinically as declining academic performance and school refusal.

6. Theoretical Framework

The architecture of the Mood and Feelings Questionnaire-Self Report is grounded in two primary theoretical orientations: the Developmental Psychopathology Framework and Cognitive Theories of Affective Disorders, integrated with empirical psychiatric epidemiology.

6.1. The Developmental Psychopathology Framework

Formulated by scholars such as Dante Cicchetti, Alan Sroufe, and Michael Rutter, developmental psychopathology conceptualizes childhood psychiatric disorders not as static disease entities grafted onto an adult template, but as dynamic deviations from normative developmental pathways. Angold and Costello recognized that pediatric depression had historically been obscured by competing, unvalidated theories—ranging from psychoanalytic notions of “masked depression” to the assertion that children lacked the mature superego structure necessary to experience genuine clinical depression.

The MFQ was designed under the premise that while the core phenotypic features of affective illness (depressed affect, anhedonia, neurovegetative slowing) remain developmentally continuous from childhood through adulthood, their behavioral and linguistic manifestations are shaped by maturation. The phrasing of the MFQ items intentionally employs clear, direct, and non-stigmatizing natural language (e.g., “I thought nobody really loved me” rather than abstract psychopathological formulations such as “interpersonal rejection expectations”) to accommodate varying levels of emotional literacy across early childhood, middle childhood, and adolescence.

6.2. Beck’s Cognitive Theory of Depression

The MFQ-Self strongly reflects the cognitive conceptualizations established by Aaron T. Beck. Beck posited that depression is maintained by the activation of rigid, negative latent schemas concerning the self, the personal world, and the future—collectively known as the Cognitive Triad. When youths experience negative life events (e.g., academic failure, peer rejection, family conflict), these depressogenic schemas become activated, precipitating systematic cognitive errors such as catastrophizing, selective abstraction, and overgeneralization.

The item composition of the MFQ heavily emphasizes negative cognitions about the self (“I hated myself,” “I was a bad person”) and perceived helplessness (“I did everything wrong”). It mirrors Beck’s assertion that cognitive self-blame is not merely a secondary epiphenomenon of low mood, but a primary driver that maintains dysphoria, behavioral passivity, and social withdrawal.

6.3. Learned Helplessness and Reformulated Attributional Models

The scale also interfaces with Martin Seligman and Lyn Abramson’s Learned Helplessness and Hopelessness Theories. According to the reformulated attributional model, individuals vulnerable to depression possess an internal, stable, and global explanatory style for negative events. When a youth endorses “I thought I could never be as good as other kids” and “I did everything wrong,” they are exhibiting an internal (“it is me”), stable (“I could never be”), and global (“everything”) attributional style, which directly cultivates despair and blunts proactive coping mechanisms.

7. Validity

The construct, criterion, convergent, and discriminant validity of the MFQ-Self (both full and short versions) have been scrutinized across dozens of empirical studies encompassing tens of thousands of participants globally.

7.1. Convergent Validity

In the seminal psychometric validation studies conducted by Angold et al. (1995), the MFQ demonstrated strong, statistically significant correlations with established child depression measures. Specifically, the MFQ-Self correlated strongly with the Children’s Depression Inventory (CDI; Pearson’s r ranging from .67 to .81 across samples) and with continuous depressive symptom counts derived from the structured Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Assessment (CAPA; r = .64 to .76) and the Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children (DISC; r = .58 to .72).

Subsequent contemporary investigations have affirmed robust convergent validity with modern internalizing instruments. Wood et al. (1995) documented strong convergence between the SMFQ and the Reynolds Adolescent Depression Scale (RADS, r = .84), while Sharp et al. (2012) demonstrated substantial correlations with the depression subscale of the Revised Child Anxiety and Depression Scale (RCADS-D, r = .78).

7.2. Discriminant Validity

Establishing discriminant validity in pediatric internalizing psychopathology is notoriously challenging due to the high rates of comorbid anxiety and depressive disorders in youth. Nevertheless, Angold et al. (1995) and Costello et al. confirmed that the MFQ-Self demonstrates greater shared variance with depressive diagnoses than with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), conduct disorder (CD), or oppositional defiant disorder (ODD). Although scores on the MFQ correlate moderately with anxiety scales (such as the Multidimensional Anxiety Scale for Children [MASC] or the SCARED, with r values typically between .45 and .55), latent variable analyses confirm that the MFQ items retain unique, high loadings on an independent depressive factor after controlling for general negative affectivity.

7.3. Criterion-Related and Diagnostic Validity

Criterion validity has been verified against DSM-defined clinical diagnostic status evaluated through gold-standard psychiatric interviews. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses consistently document high Area Under the Curve (AUC) statistics, generally ranging between 0.82 and 0.91 for major depressive disorder.

• Angold et al. (1995): In the initial validation study, a cut-off score of 8 or higher on the 13-item Short MFQ-Self (SMFQ) yielded the optimal clinical trade-off between sensitivity (approx. 75%) and specificity (approx. 84%) for identifying clinical depression in school and community samples.
• Rhew et al. (2010): In a community-based diagnostic validation study involving 521 sixth-grade students (mean age = 11.5 years; comprising 476 non-depressed and 36 clinically depressed youths diagnosed via structured clinical interviews), the SMFQ-Self displayed moderate to high diagnostic accuracy. At a cut-off score of 4, sensitivity and specificity balanced most closely at 0.66 and 0.61, respectively, producing an AUC of 0.71. In community screening settings where minimizing false negatives is paramount to ensure vulnerable youth are not missed, lower cutoffs (e.g., 4 or 5) are frequently recommended, whereas in specialty psychiatric settings, higher cutoffs (e.g., 8 to 11) are preferred to maximize positive predictive value.
• Daviss et al. (2006): In an outpatient psychiatric sample, Daviss and colleagues found that an SMFQ cut-off score of 11 provided optimal balance, achieving a sensitivity of 0.74 and a specificity of 0.73, while the full 33-item MFQ-Self at a cut-off of 27 yielded a sensitivity of 0.78 and a specificity of 0.76 against DSM-IV major depressive disorder.

8. Reliability

The reliability of the MFQ-Self has been comprehensively documented across diverse demographic cohorts, language translations, and clinical environments.

8.1. Internal Consistency

The scale exhibits consistently high internal consistency across both non-clinical and clinical populations:

• Short Form (13-item SMFQ-Self): Angold et al. (1995) reported Cronbach’s alpha coefficients ranging between .85 and .87 in general adolescent cohorts. Rhew et al. (2010) reported an alpha of .84 in their sixth-grade epidemiological cohort. In psychiatric and primary care clinical settings, internal consistency estimates frequently reach .88 to .91 (Daviss et al., 2006; Sharp et al., 2012). McDonald’s omega total (ω_t) values similarly exceed .89, confirming that internal consistency is not an artifact of tau-equivalence violations.
• Full Form (33-item MFQ-Self): The full scale regularly achieves Cronbach’s alphas between .91 and .95, indicating an exceptionally reliable measurement of the broader depressive syndrome.

8.2. Test-Retest Reliability

Evaluating test-retest reliability in pediatric affective disorders requires balancing psychometric stability against genuine state-dependent fluctuations in youth emotional experience. Over short assessment intervals (e.g., 1 to 2 weeks), the MFQ-Self demonstrates moderate to high test-retest stability:

• Angold et al. (1995) established intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) and Pearson correlation coefficients of r = .78 to .84 over a 2-week retest interval among stable non-clinical youth.
• Over longer durations (e.g., 2 to 3 months), retest correlations attenuate to between r = .50 and .65. This planned attenuation reflects true developmental and environmental variability, responsive symptom shifts, or spontaneous remission rather than instrument instability, demonstrating the tool’s sensitivity to longitudinal change.

8.3. Informant Concordance and Reliability

Concordance between the MFQ-Self and parent-proxy report (MFQ-Parent) aligns with broader patterns documented in developmental psychopathology meta-analyses (Achenbach et al.). Pearson correlations between child and parent reports typically fall within the moderate range of r = .35 to .52. Importantly, research demonstrates that this cross-informant divergence reflects complementary situational observations rather than measurement error; youth report more reliably on subtle internal suffering and subjective feelings of inadequacy, while parents report more accurately on observable vegetative changes, school attendance, and psychomotor behavioral agitation.

9. Factor Analysis

The latent factor architecture of the MFQ-Self has been investigated extensively using Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA), Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA), and Item Response Theory (IRT).

9.1. Unidimensionality and Factor Structure

In the original structural validation of the Short MFQ (SMFQ-Self), Angold et al. (1995) extracted a clear single-factor solution. Scree plot analyses and eigenvalue ratios strongly supported unidimensionality, with the first unrotated principal component accounting for over 45% to 52% of the total variance across diverse development samples. CFA modeling routinely confirms acceptable to superior fit indices for a single-factor construct representing global depressive symptomatology:

• Comparative Fit Index (CFI) > 0.94
• Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI) > 0.93
• Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) < 0.06 (90% CI: 0.048–0.068)
• Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR) < 0.04

9.2. Multidimensional and Bi-Factor Formulations

While the 13-item short form operates effectively as a unidimensional screener, psychometric analyses of the full 33-item MFQ-Self frequently reveal multidimensional or hierarchical bi-factor structures. Factor analytic investigations (e.g., Sharp et al., 2012; Thabrew et al., 2018) often identify three to four underlying sub-dimensions nested within a dominant general depression factor (g-depression):

1. Cognitive / Negative Self-Evaluation: Dominated by items evaluating self-hatred, moral guilt, perceived failure, and worthlessness.
2. Affective / Dysphoric Anhedonia: Defined by items indexing persistent sadness, crying, and an inability to experience enjoyment or pleasure.
3. Vegetative / Somatosensory Fatigue: Comprising lethargy, extreme physical tiredness, concentration difficulties, and psychomotor changes.
4. Suicidal / Self-Harm Cognitions: (Present on the full 33-item version), capturing active thoughts of death and suicidal ideation.

In bi-factor CFA models, the general depression factor accounts for the vast majority of common variance (Explained Common Variance [ECV] > 0.70 to 0.80), supporting the practice of summing all items into a single, unified composite score for clinical decision-making.

9.3. Item Response Theory (IRT) Insights

Modern psychometric studies utilizing the two-parameter logistic (2PL) and Graded Response Models (GRM) demonstrate that items on the MFQ-Self differ meaningfully in their item discrimination (α) and item difficulty/severity threshold parameters (β):

• High-Discrimination Items: Items tapping severe negative self-evaluation—such as “I hated myself” and “I felt I was no good anymore”—exhibit the highest discrimination parameters (α > 2.20). These items provide substantial psychometric information for differentiating between moderate and severe clinical states.
• Low-Threshold Items: Items such as “I felt miserable or unhappy” and “I felt so tired I just sat around and did nothing” feature lower difficulty parameters (β), functioning effectively as sensitive indicators for mild dysphoria or subclinical distress at the lower end of the depressive continuum.

10. Instrument / Measurement Tool

The structured technical characteristics of the Mood and Feelings Questionnaire-Self Report (Short Version, 13 items) are detailed below:

• Instrument Name: Mood and Feelings Questionnaire – Short Version – Self Report (SMFQ-Self / MFQ-Self)
• Instrument Type: Psychometric self-report rating scale / clinical screener
• Target Population: Children and adolescents aged 6 to 17 years (readable at approximately a 2nd to 3rd-grade reading level; for younger children aged 6–8, clinicians or research staff may read items aloud)
• Informant: Youth self-report
• Recall Period: Past two weeks (14 days preceding administration)
• Item Count: 13 items on the Short Form (33 items on the Full Version)
• Response Format: 3-point ordinal Likert scale:
  • 0 = Not True
  • 1 = Sometimes
  • 2 = True
• Scoring Procedure:
  • All 13 items are scored positively (there are no reverse-coded items).
  • Responses are summed across items to generate a single composite score.
  • Minimum Possible Score: 0
  • Maximum Possible Score: 26
• Interpretation & Clinical Cut-off Benchmarks:
  • Score Range 0 – 3: Minimal or asymptomatic depressive symptoms; within normative limits.
  • Score Range 4 – 7: Mild or borderline depressive symptoms. In universal school-based screening programs, a cut-off of ≥ 4 or ≥ 5 provides elevated sensitivity (0.66–0.75) for detecting early distress, signaling the need for psychoeducation or secondary monitoring (Rhew et al., 2010).
  • Score Range 8 – 10: Moderate depressive symptomatology. A cut-off of ≥ 8 is the empirically validated standard threshold established by Angold et al. (1995) in community studies, demonstrating an optimal balance of sensitivity (0.75) and specificity (0.84) indicating probable clinical depression.
  • Score Range 11 – 26: Moderate-to-severe depressive symptomatology. Scores ≥ 11 are strongly associated with DSM-congruent Major Depressive Disorder in specialty psychiatric clinics (Daviss et al., 2006). Comprehensive multidisciplinary evaluation (including suicide risk assessment) is strongly recommended.
• Administration Time: Approximately 2 to 5 minutes.

11. Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The Mood and Feelings Questionnaire suite was formally published in 1995 by Adrian Angold, Elizabeth Jane Costello, and colleagues following several years of field trials in North Carolina and the United Kingdom.

Licensing and Accessibility: The MFQ instruments (both the full 33-item version and the 13-item short form, across self-, parent-, and teacher-report forms) are maintained by the Center for Developmental Epidemiology at Duke University Medical Center. The authors and Duke University have placed the instrument in the public domain for clinical, educational, and academic research purposes.

Fee Structure: The MFQ is available free of charge. No licensing fees, commercial royalties, or per-use test battery charges are required for non-commercial research, academic inquiry, or routine non-profit clinical practice. Users are strictly requested not to alter the item wording or response scales without explicit written permission, and appropriate scholarly attribution must be cited in all academic publications, theses, and technical reports using the instrument.

Official Web Repository: Copies of the questionnaires, scoring templates, user guides, and translations in multiple languages are accessible via Duke University’s Developmental Epidemiology website (https://devepi.duhs.duke.edu/measures/mfq/).

12. References

Angold, A., Costello, E. J., Messer, S. C., Pickles, A., Winder, F., & Silver, D. (1995). The development of a short questionnaire for use in epidemiological studies of depression in children and adolescents. International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research, 5(4), 237–249.

Angold, A., & Costello, E. J. (1987). Mood and Feelings Questionnaire (MFQ). Duke University Medical Center, Center for Developmental Epidemiology, Durham, NC.

Beck, A. T. (1976). Cognitive therapy and the emotional disorders. International Universities Press. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0035848

Costello, E. J., & Angold, A. (1988). Scales to assess child and adolescent depression: Checklists, screens, and clinical interviews. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 27(6), 726–737. https://doi.org/10.1097/00004583-198811000-00011

Costello, E. J., Mustillo, S., Erkanli, A., Keeler, G., & Angold, A. (2003). Prevalence and development of psychiatric disorders in childhood and adolescence. Archives of General Psychiatry, 60(8), 837–844. https://doi.org/10.1001/archpsyc.60.8.837

Daviss, W. B., Birmaher, B., Melhem, N. A., Axelson, D. A., Michaels, S. M., & Brent, D. A. (2006). Criterion validity of the Mood and Feelings Questionnaire for depressive episodes in clinic and non-clinic-referred youths. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 47(9), 927–934. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2006.01646.x

Rhew, I. C., Simpson, K., Tracy, M., Lymp, J., McCauley, E., Tsuang, D., & Vander Stoep, A. (2010). Criterion validity of the Short Mood and Feelings Questionnaire and one- and two-item depression screens in young adolescents. Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health, 4, Article 8. https://doi.org/10.1186/1753-2000-4-8

Sharp, C., Goodyer, I. M., & Croudace, T. J. (2006). The Short Mood and Feelings Questionnaire (SMFQ): A unidimensional item response theory and categorical data factor analysis of self-report ratings from a community sample of young adolescents. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 34(5), 665–677. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-006-9053-2

Sharp, C., Kim, S., & Young, J. (2012). The Short Mood and Feelings Questionnaire (SMFQ) in inpatient adolescents: Psychometric properties and diagnostic utility. Journal of Affective Disorders, 140(3), 304–308. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2012.02.015

Thabrew, H., Stasiak, K., Bavin, L. M., Frampton, C., & Merry, S. (2018). Validation of the Mood and Feelings Questionnaire (MFQ) and Short Mood and Feelings Questionnaire (SMFQ) in New Zealand help-seeking adolescents. International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research, 27(3), e1610. https://doi.org/10.1002/mpr.1610

Wood, A., Kroll, L., Moore, A., & Harrington, R. (1995). Properties of the Short Mood and Feelings Questionnaire in normal and clinical young people. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 4(2), 62–77. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02062635

13. Items of the Scale